T.C. İSTANBUL MEDENİYET UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF GRADUATE STUDIES DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL OTTOMAN STUDIES THE ABOLITION OF THE PATRIARCHATE OF PEĆ IN THE CONTEXT OF THE EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY OTTOMAN INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTS CAMILLA PLETUHINA-TONEV SUPERVISOR DR. ELİF BAYRAKTAR-TELLAN JULY 2019 ABSTRACT The eighteenth century was a time of institutionalization for the Orthodox Patriarchates of Istanbul, Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria in parallel to the Ottoman social, economic, and administrative developments. In this context, the Patriarchate of Peć was incorporated into the Patriarchate of Istanbul in 1766. Although the regions under the jurisdiction of the church of Peć were important for the Ottoman administration especially in terms of population, the situation on the eve of abolition still remains unexplored. Moreover, the abolition of Peć has so far been evaluated as part of ecclesiastical history, mostly limited to the question of who the initiating actors of abolition were. As recent studies have started to locate the history of the Orthodox Patriarchates in the larger context of Ottoman social, economic and administrative developments, it became clear that the approach towards the abolition of Peć requires revision. This study aims to investigate the interplay between the Ottoman administration, the Patriarchate of Istanbul and the local actors in the context of the eighteenth century economic and administrative developments based on Ottoman archival documents as well as communal sources. Keywords: Patriarchate of Peć, Orthodox Patriarchate of Istanbul, abolition, eighteenth century, institutionalization. i ÖZET On sekizinci yüzyıl, İstanbul, Kudüs, Antakya ve İskenderiye Ortodoks Patrikhaneleri için bir kurumsallaşma dönemiydi. Bu çerçevede, 1766 yılında İpek Patrikhanesi, İstanbul Rum Ortodoks Patrikhanesi'ne ilhak olunmuştur. İpek kilisesinin yetkisi altındaki bölgeler, özellikle nüfus açısından Osmanlı yönetimi için önemli olmasına rağmen, kilisenin, ilhak olmadan önce bulunduğu durum incelenmemiştir. Bunun yanı sıra, İpek Patrikhanesi’nin, İstanbul Rum Ortodoks Patrikhanesi’ne ilhakı günümüze kadar kilise tarihi çerçevesinde değerlendirilmiştir ve çoğunlukla ilhak inisiyatifinde bulunan aktörlerin kim olduğu sorusuyla sınırlı kalmıştır. Yakın zamanda yapılan çalışmaların, Ortodoks Patrikhaneleri’nin tarihini daha geniş Osmanlı sosyal, ekonomik ve idari gelişmeleri çerçevesinde değerlendirmeye başlaması ile İpek'in ilhakına yönelik mevcut yaklaşımın gözden geçirilmesi gerektiği ortaya çıkmıştır. Bu çalışma, Osmanlı arşiv belgelerine ve yerel kaynaklara dayanarak on sekizinci yüzyıl ekonomik ve idari gelişmeler bağlamında Osmanlı yönetimi, İstanbul Rum Ortodoks Patrikhanesi ve yerel aktörler arasındaki etkileşimi araştırmayı amaçlamaktadır. Anahtar kelimeler: İpek Patrikhanesi, İstanbul Rum Ortodoks Patrikhanesi, ilhak, on sekizinci yüzyıl, kurumsallaşma. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First of all, I would like to thank Turkish Scholarships for financing my studies for the past seven years. Without any doubt, the opportunity to live and study in Turkey has changed my life in the ways I could never imagine. I owe my deepest gratitude to Prof. Muzaffer Doğan of Anadolu University for spending cmany hours supervising my attempts of transcribing and comprehending Ottoman primary sources. Without his patience and guidance, the execution of my current study would not be possible. I would also like to thank Erkan İznik of Anadolu University, for guiding me through the first year of my studies, when I could barely understand Turkish, and felt completely lost and helpless. I am very grateful to the faculty members of the International Ottoman Studies Program of Istanbul Medeniyet University. Bilgin Aydın, Güneş Işıksel, and İsmail Hakkı Kadı, whose lessons I was lucky to attend contributed greatly to my growth as a student of history. Their dedication to their jobs and involvement with the students made me feel embraced and cared for from the first day I entered the University. I would like to express my gratitude to my thesis committee members and professors. Zahit Atçıl, who happened to be teaching the classes I initially had almost no interest in, managed to organize the classes in a way that I was always looking forward to them. His professionalism, critical approach to history, treatment of each student with the utmost respect and care, never ending eagerness to support his students, his open-mindedness, and, of course, coffee made every single class of his like a little party for my mind and soul. Hasan Çolak’s contribution to the field of study of the Orthodox Patriarchates in the Ottoman Empire became a major point of reference for me in my current research. I am eternally grateful for and humbled by the fact that he took the time and effort to come from another city to be a member in my thesis committee. Finally, my thesis supervisor iii Elif Bayraktar-Tellan has guided me through the two years of my master’s studies with the love, care, attention and support, which I will be eternally grateful for. Every minor and major achievement of mine during these two years as well as all the academic achievements I will hopefully attain in the future are and will always be equally the result of my dedication and labor as they are of hers. I owe my deepest gratitude to the members of my thesis committee for the time and effort they put into the evaluation of my work and for their valuable comments and suggestions. Lastly, I would like to thank my family: my mother Larisa, my friend Daria and my husband Dmitri have always been there for me. I aspire to become at least the tenth part of that amazing person they lovingly and naïvely believe I already am. I extend my special thanks to my husband, who courageously embraced the ungrateful role of my much neglected consciousness, and never failed to remind me on a daily basis that I should study. With my deepest love and gratitude, I dedicate this thesis to him. iv CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION In this study, I intend to analyze the abolition of the Patriarchate of Peć in the context of the eighteenth-century Ottoman institutional developments. The Patriarchate of Peć was abolished in 1766 and incorporated into the Patriarchate of Istanbul during the period of Sultan Mustafa III after having functioned as an autocephalous ecclesiastical institution for almost four centuries. The abolition of Peć happened at a time of institutionalization for the Orthodox Patriarchates of Istanbul, Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria in parallel to the Ottoman social and economic developments. At the same time, many Ottoman institutions were going through a process of transformation. So far, the abolition of the Patriarchate of Peć has been mostly evaluated out of the context of these developments, which resulted in the erroneous treatment of this topic merely as an ecclesiastical issue. Hence, I intend to revise the paradigms, which have evolved around the abolition of the Patriarchate of Peć by placing the issue of the abolition in the context of the eighteenth century Ottoman institutional developments. To do so, I will mostly address the sources written in Serbian, Russian, English and Ottoman Turkish languages. 1.1 Problems in Historiographical Approaches and the Goals of the Study In the Serbian sources, the Patriarchate of Peć is often viewed as a means to an end, the end being the preservation of the Serbian nationality, Serbian state and Christian faith of the Serbs. Such an approach not only projects the contemporary views and values on the past but also creates a one-sided vision of the Serbian high-clergy, where the Patriarchs of Peć are presented as figures always acting upon the goal of “liberation from the Turks”, or, when the circumstances do not allow action, dreaming of it. Such an approach emphasizes the distinction of the Patriarch of Peć from the Ottoman administration as well as the Patriarchate of Istanbul. Both are often represented as enemies, the first being the enemy to Christian faith, and the second – to Serbian nationality and independence of the Serbian Church. Moreover, the Patriarchs of Peć are often presented in the best tradition of the millet theory with the Patriarch being portrayed as not merely the head of 1 the Serbian church, but rather the head of the Serbian nation and an entity separate from the Ottoman administration. While the in-depth evaluation of the Patriarchate of Peć as an Ottoman institution would require incorporation of a larger number of Ottoman archival sources which would transcend the scope of this study, I do intend to demonstrate that in the last years of the Patriarchate of Peć’s autocephaly the high clergy and the re‘âyâ relied heavily on the problem solving mechanisms and patterns used by the Eastern Orthodox Patriarchates, the Patriarchate of Istanbul and the Ottoman central administration. This allows us to revise the position of the Patriarchate of Peć in the context of the religious institutions of the Ottoman Empire. The primary issue that I aim to address is the question of the abolition of the Patriarchate of Peć and its incorporation into the Patriarchate of Istanbul. So far, the abolition of Peć has been evaluated as an ecclesiastical issue, major questions being who is to “blame” for the abolition, whether the Patriarchate was abolished canonically or not, who wrote the petition for its abolition, and whether or not the church was drowning in debt and corruption. While these questions are worthy of evaluation and attention, the sole focus on the answers to these questions have prevented historians from recognizing the larger picture of the eighteenth century Ottoman developments. By using a number of unpublished Ottoman primary documents and incorporating into my work the study of the Patriarchates of Antioch, Jerusalem, Alexandria and Istanbul, I aim to locate the issue of the abolition of the Patriarchate of Peć in the context of the eighteenth century Ottoman developments. Along with this, I would like to address several other issues that would contribute to a better understanding of the place the Patriarchate of Peć occupied in the Ottoman Empire shortly before the abolition of the former.